cALL ME A FREAK, OR WHATEVER, BUT. I like this Justice. She doesnt mess about, gets to the deep insides of the onion that is a case, and rules. Then- get this, gang- she says what she really planned on saying. Thanks, you mostly bunch of oxygen theives that is a senate confirmation comittee for doing the world a bunch of awesome . Its right in the driveway

HighOnCraic:Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

alienated:cALL ME A FREAK, OR WHATEVER, BUT. I like this Justice. She doesnt mess about, gets to the deep insides of the onion that is a case, and rules. Then- get this, gang- she says what she really planned on saying. Thanks, you mostly bunch of oxygen theives that is a senate confirmation comittee for doing the world a bunch of awesome . Its right in the driveway

I have know idea if I understood what you just said (I've been drinking) but it sounded sorta cool Yea everybody got lucky she was picked and approved for SCOTUS. Hell If only we had more like her.

Noam Chimpsky:brimed03: Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

On the one hand, I want to say to you: stop trying to make the "samer" thing happen; it's not going to happen.

On the other, I like that "samer" sounds like "saner." Gives me warm fuzzies that you think gay marriages are saner marriages.

Go you, you FABULOUS man!

Yes, well, this 'samer' word I invented is useful because it covers both male/male and female/female. The word 'gay' often is to apply only to men whereas women/women has the word 'lesbian'. Samer covers both instances of non hetero couplings.

When I was a teen, "gay" covered lesbians too. I still use it as an all inclusive. Kinda like "the guys" and any of 1000 other words that are technically masculine but are commonly used to refer to mixed sex or even all female groups.

Anyway, I live in Alabama, and "samer" sounds like something Johnny-boy would sneer as he gets off his four wheeler after coming back from the Walmart with a case of Bud and some pork rinds. If your goal is try to create a label that already sounds vaguely like a slur, congratz. If you're trying to create a "safe" word for it, I got news: you're acting "special".

Gyrfalcon:HighOnCraic: Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

I saw oral arguments a couple years ago. It was a huge pleasure to be in the same room as Ginsburg. Thomas, not so much. He disgusts me because he doesn't deserve the seat. Scalia is at least smart even though I loathe his existence.

The real story here isn't that she's going to officiate a gay wedding, no surprise that she's doing that. It's not even that one of the grooms is named John Roberts, though that's REALLY funny.

No, the real story is in this quote: "I think it will be one more statement that people who love each other and want to live together should be able to enjoy the blessings and the strife in the marriage relationship," Ginsburg said of the pending nuptuals [sic] during a recent interview. "It won't be long before there will be another."

Specifically, the last bit is really informative. She appears to be predicting the outcome of a future case - they couldn't do it with the Prop 8 case, the standing issue was just too big. But it's a clear signal that she thinks the votes are there to make marriage discrimination illegal nationwide.

Noam Chimpsky:These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

MadAzza:Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

What are you talking about?

He's not going gently into that good night. It is beginning to dawn on the hateful s um of the American Right that the Reagan Years are coming to an end. The Boomers, whose aging minds and huge population edge gave them disproportionate power, and dying and going senile. Without them, the Right dies at the polls. The GOP is about to get a massive eight-year enema.We're going to see a lot more inchoate raging and terrorist violence from the righties before we finish shoveling them into the waste of history.

No, there's just been talk about her maybe stepping down while Obama is in office and control of the senate is a sure thing so that an appropriate replacement can be confirmed without GOP meddling, but I doubt it will happen. The Democrats should hold the Senate through midterms and unless something changes dramatically in the GOP they don't have a shot in taking the White House in '16.

Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

tillerman35:Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

I don't really think so. No one would question a justice's bias if he or she officiated over a straight wedding.

No, there's just been talk about her maybe stepping down while Obama is in office and control of the senate is a sure thing so that an appropriate replacement can be confirmed without GOP meddling, but I doubt it will happen. The Democrats should hold the Senate through midterms and unless something changes dramatically in the GOP they don't have a shot in taking the White House in '16.

What a stupid coont.

So, do you hate her because she is a woman, or because she supports gays, or both. I'm trying to nail down what kind of bigot you are. I already have you down for racist, and possibly very violent, due to your previous comments. Let me tell you, your name reference to killdozer is not helping either.

kitsuneymg:Noam Chimpsky: brimed03: Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

On the one hand, I want to say to you: stop trying to make the "samer" thing happen; it's not going to happen.

On the other, I like that "samer" sounds like "saner." Gives me warm fuzzies that you think gay marriages are saner marriages.

Go you, you FABULOUS man!

Yes, well, this 'samer' word I invented is useful because it covers both male/male and female/female. The word 'gay' often is to apply only to men whereas women/women has the word 'lesbian'. Samer covers both instances of non hetero couplings.

When I was a teen, "gay" covered lesbians too. I still use it as an all inclusive. Kinda like "the guys" and any of 1000 other words that are technically masculine but are commonly used to refer to mixed sex or even all female groups.

Anyway, I live in Alabama, and "samer" sounds like something Johnny-boy would sneer as he gets off his four wheeler after coming back from the Walmart with a case of Bud and some pork rinds. If your goal is try to create a label that already sounds vaguely like a slur, congratz. If you're trying to create a "safe" word for it, I got news: you're acting "special".

It must be a slur cos you are imagining johnny-boy at walmart and some other things. That must be the test.

I finally invent a useful word and the cult-speak community deems it a 'slur'. I guess that's something new for my resume-- slur inventor.

No, there's just been talk about her maybe stepping down while Obama is in office and control of the senate is a sure thing so that an appropriate replacement can be confirmed without GOP meddling, but I doubt it will happen. The Democrats should hold the Senate through midterms and unless something changes dramatically in the GOP they don't have a shot in taking the White House in '16.

I thought the same thing in 2000, after the GOP's Contract On America.

haolegirl:Well this is just awesome! I'm totally straight, but I'd go gay just to say I had a supreme court justice officiate at my wedding!

In what jurisdiction do Supreme Court Justices have the authority to marry people? Sure, they are judges, but wouldn't they have to be a judge or justice of the peace in a particular state in order to marry people?

flondrix:haolegirl: Well this is just awesome! I'm totally straight, but I'd go gay just to say I had a supreme court justice officiate at my wedding!

In what jurisdiction do Supreme Court Justices have the authority to marry people? Sure, they are judges, but wouldn't they have to be a judge or justice of the peace in a particular state in order to marry people?

The judges on the court didn't spring forth from a rock or fall from the heavens. They are all from some state or another.

tillerman35:Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

did it matter when Scalia went hunting with a guy before hearing his case?

LasersHurt:flondrix: haolegirl: Well this is just awesome! I'm totally straight, but I'd go gay just to say I had a supreme court justice officiate at my wedding!

In what jurisdiction do Supreme Court Justices have the authority to marry people? Sure, they are judges, but wouldn't they have to be a judge or justice of the peace in a particular state in order to marry people?

The judges on the court didn't spring forth from a rock or fall from the heavens. They are all from some state or another.

imo federal judges should have jurisdiction in all states. the justices can rule on suits from any state.

Noam Chimpsky:brimed03: Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

On the one hand, I want to say to you: stop trying to make the "samer" thing happen; it's not going to happen.

On the other, I like that "samer" sounds like "saner." Gives me warm fuzzies that you think gay marriages are saner marriages.

Go you, you FABULOUS man!

Yes, well, this 'samer' word I invented is a cry for help and attention. I am not stupid but I pretend to be stupid on a website so that people will interact with me.useful because it covers both male/male and female/female. The word 'gay' often is to apply only to men whereas women/women has the word 'lesbian'. Samer covers both instances of non hetero couplings.

Hobodeluxe:tillerman35: Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

did it matter when Scalia went hunting with a guy before hearing his case?

I don't recall Thomas recusing himself from the health care vote, even though his Tea Party activist wife has ties to a bunch of anti-Obamacare groups.

cc_rider:Hobodeluxe: tillerman35: Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

did it matter when Scalia went hunting with a guy before hearing his case?

I don't recall Thomas recusing himself from the health care vote, even though his Tea Party activist wife has ties to a bunch of anti-Obamacare groups.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2011/02/clarence-thomas-too-bi as ed-to-hear-obamacare.html

cc_rider:Hobodeluxe: tillerman35: Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

did it matter when Scalia went hunting with a guy before hearing his case?

I don't recall Thomas recusing himself from the health care vote, even though his Tea Party activist wife has ties to a bunch of anti-Obamacare groups.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2011/02/clarence-thomas-too-bi as ed-to-hear-obamacare.html

Hasn't Scalia had paid speaking engagements on some of the issues he has also ruled on as a justice?

Well yes, as a matter of fact. 'Doctor' and 'nurse' haven't been gender-specific as professions since EVER.

/still annoyed after 30 years of being referred to as 'the lady goldsmith'//still have men instructing me in how to fix the jewelry THEY bring to ME///still have fun calmly replying, "Would you like it fixed correctly or the way you want it done?"

flondrix:haolegirl: Well this is just awesome! I'm totally straight, but I'd go gay just to say I had a supreme court justice officiate at my wedding!

In what jurisdiction do Supreme Court Justices have the authority to marry people? Sure, they are judges, but wouldn't they have to be a judge or justice of the peace in a particular state in order to marry people?

Congress gives them that authority. At the wedding I was at she specifically stated: "By the power that is invested in me by the Congress of the United States of America ..."

I finally invent a useful word come right out and start calling namesand the cult-speak community deems it a 'slur'. I guess that's something new for my resume not in the slightest surprising-- slur inventor.

FTFY

No, 'samer' is just your handy way of lumping all those folks together for the convenience of saving on typing with your fat-sounding greasy sausage fingers.

Noam Chimpsky:kitsuneymg: Noam Chimpsky: brimed03: Noam Chimpsky: These progressives are just consumed by the samer weddings. Nothing else matters. Many progressives have died of starvation recently because they forgot about food while thinking about the awesomeness of men marrying men and women marrying women.

On the one hand, I want to say to you: stop trying to make the "samer" thing happen; it's not going to happen.

On the other, I like that "samer" sounds like "saner." Gives me warm fuzzies that you think gay marriages are saner marriages.

Go you, you FABULOUS man!

Yes, well, this 'samer' word I invented is useful because it covers both male/male and female/female. The word 'gay' often is to apply only to men whereas women/women has the word 'lesbian'. Samer covers both instances of non hetero couplings.

When I was a teen, "gay" covered lesbians too. I still use it as an all inclusive. Kinda like "the guys" and any of 1000 other words that are technically masculine but are commonly used to refer to mixed sex or even all female groups.

Anyway, I live in Alabama, and "samer" sounds like something Johnny-boy would sneer as he gets off his four wheeler after coming back from the Walmart with a case of Bud and some pork rinds. If your goal is try to create a label that already sounds vaguely like a slur, congratz. If you're trying to create a "safe" word for it, I got news: you're acting "special".

It must be a slur cos you are imagining johnny-boy at walmart and some other things. That must be the test.

I finally invent a useful word and the cult-speak community deems it a 'slur'. I guess that's something new for my resume-- slur inventor.

People. People get married. It's a word in common use now and has a clear meaning. I suggest using it.

We are slowly moving past focusing on these differences and creating another word, in light of the changing times, is a step back. Thus, a slur.

flondrix:cc_rider: Hobodeluxe: tillerman35: Won't this now be used by opponents of gender/orientation/whatever equality to put a lot of pressure on her to recuse herself whenever a case related to this subject is argued before the court? Seems to me by doing something so public, she's effectively stating that she has a bias toward one side of the argument.

did it matter when Scalia went hunting with a guy before hearing his case?

I don't recall Thomas recusing himself from the health care vote, even though his Tea Party activist wife has ties to a bunch of anti-Obamacare groups.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2011/02/clarence-thomas-too-bi as ed-to-hear-obamacare.html

Hasn't Scalia had paid speaking engagements on some of the issues he has also ruled on as a justice?

Unlikely. SCOTUS justices can not accept money for speaking engagements, though whoever hires them may donate money to charity on their behalf. He's evil, but not stupid.

Hasn't Scalia had paid speaking engagements on some of the issues he has also ruled on as a justice?

Unlikely. SCOTUS justices can not accept money for speaking engagements, though whoever hires them may donate money to charity on their behalf. He's evil, but not stupid. [citation needed]

I think they can if it is "teaching" and they report it on their financial disclosure forms.

They can have their travel expenses reimbursed, but sitting justices cannot accept monetary payments (honoraria) for public speaking gigs. Retired justices are not bound by this law.

"According to the US Code regarding Ethics, Title 5A, §501, career government employees who occupy positions above GS-15 (which includes all US Supreme Court justices) have an outside earned income cap equal to 15% or less of their annual salary. They may not accept money for speaking engagements (called Honoraria, see (b)) other than reimbursement of reasonable expenses. The institution to which they speak may, instead, donate a maximum of $2,000 to a charity on the speaker's behalf."

Chief Justice John Roberts received $20,000 and air transportation, meals and lodging in Valletta, Malta, for a six-day course he taught on the history of the Supreme Court for the New England School of Law, also known as New England Law, just after the court upheld President Barack Obama's 2010 health-care overhaul.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan, Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg likewise reported teaching income. Thomas taught at George Washington University Law School; Kagan at Harvard College; Scalia at John Marshall Law School, St. John's University, St. Mary's University, the University of Southern California and Wesleyan University; and Ginsburg at a European summer program run by Wake Forest School of Law.

Ginsburg also reported receiving $15,819 for a two-day guest lecture at Yale University in October. Scalia reported receiving nearly $64,000 from West Services Inc., a division of Thomson Reuters, for co-writing two legal texts.

sdd2000:Chief Justice John Roberts received $20,000 and air transportation, meals and lodging in Valletta, Malta, for a six-day course he taught on the history of the Supreme Court for the New England School of Law, also known as New England Law, just after the court upheld President Barack Obama's 2010 health-care overhaul.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan, Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg likewise reported teaching income. Thomas taught at George Washington University Law School; Kagan at Harvard College; Scalia at John Marshall Law School, St. John's University, St. Mary's University, the University of Southern California and Wesleyan University; and Ginsburg at a European summer program run by Wake Forest School of Law.

Ginsburg also reported receiving $15,819 for a two-day guest lecture at Yale University in October. Scalia reported receiving nearly $64,000 from West Services Inc., a division of Thomson Reuters, for co-writing two legal texts.

You are correct, but the law also considers "writing" and "teaching" to be in a different category than "public speaking engagements".